True Crime Analysis, Breakthroughs, Insights & Discussions Hosted by Bestselling Author Nick van der Leek

Tag: Interrogation

This is the Moment Chris Watts Gets Angry when interviewed by the FBI

Chris Watts’ trademark move is to appear cool and calm. He wants others to see him as suave and have a positive impression of him. He tries not to get flustered. Unlike Shan’ann, Watts is uncomfortable admitting to his emotions, and reluctant to show when he is upset or irritated.

This is what makes the FBI interrogation of Watts fascinating to watch. It’s a delicate dance between law enforcement and triple murderer, where both sides are trying not to antagonize the other. The main difference between the two sides is the longer law enforcement can get Watts talking, the more information they get on him, and the more they can wear him down.

This is why Watts finally “confesses” right at the end of several hours of questioning. Once he gives them what they want, he thinks it will be over, and that will be the finish line. But once he confesses, well, they’re relentless, they’re only getting started.

It should be noted that there isn’t so much a single moment when Watts gets angry, but several moments. Many of them, if not most, happen right at the end of his second day of brain-numbing grilling by two expert agents.

At 9:11 in the clip below, which is Part 9 of a total of 7 hour-long clips, Agent Tammy Lee asks Watts if she can ask him “another tough question”. She doesn’t just ask him. She doesn’t hit him on the chin with it; she asks him gently if she can ask, then she asks.

At this point Watts is fairly open about himself “losing it” but also “feeling so numb”. He refers to the children appearing “blue and limp”, something he admits he’s never seen before in his life. Seeing dead people, and killing them, is traumatic, even if it’s intentional. But it’s during this critical period where he is admitting to his emotions [regardless whether these admissions are true or not] that he starts to become emotionally authentic in the interview. He has his head down, now not even making eye-contact with his interrogators. His voice sounds weary, and somewhat high-pitched. This is not to say Watts is being truthful, just that a lot more is being leaked out here than in the rest of the interrogation.

We see this as he increasingly starts to cut Lee and Coder off. When Lee asks Watts if he thought about calling an ambulance [this is in the first version here the children were killed inside the home] Watts answers that he didn’t know what to do; they appeared completely dead to him, he says. But Lee doesn’t buy it. She tells Watts she’s been doing this job a long time, and knows something about [criminal] psychology and how people think; Watts cuts her off, telling her, “I know.”

At 12:38 Lee tells Watts “none of this makes sense”. Watts starts gesticulating wildly with his hands, at her.

WATTS: None of this makes sense. Nothing…like…[gestures] WHY SHE WOULD BE THERE…[raises his voice]…any, any of this makes sense.

Watts checks himself, then raises his hand over his face, blocking Lee off. Lee persists with another question, and Watts cuts her off again, telling her, “my God, no!” For Watts, this is as confrontational as he gets [when he’s not committing murder]. And then Coder takes over.

CODER: We’re pretty cynical in our jobs, right, and tonight we’ve had to talk a lot about a lot of things, and…[dips head]…don’t get mad, but what it looks like, is that [brushes aside his notepad, gestures to the desk]…you found a new life, and the only way to get that new life was to get rid of the old life.

We know Coder is 100% on point right here, and we know Watts knows it too. The hairs at the back of his neck ought to be standing on end. How did it make him feel, after hours of questioning, to be presented with the truth? Watts doesn’t answer. When confronted with the truth, he withdraws.

CODER: And I think that you killed these girls…before their mom came home…and then killed Shan’ann…

WATTS [Whispers]: God no.

Look at Watts’ body language. He’s shifting in his chair, he’s wiping at the left side of his face with the palm of his hand, like he’s in a nightmare he can’t get out of, can’t wake up out of.

Fullscreen capture 20190907 114927

Watts doesn’t directly answer or respond to the merits of Coder’s question. These are HUGE accusations by Coder. Watts has nothing to say, so Coder continues.

CODER: That’s what we’re left with; that’s what we have to believe. Because…it just doesn’t make sense [referring to what Lee has just said]…I mean, gestures to Lee…

Fullscreen capture 20190907 120143

This is where the subtle [but not so subtle] strategy of having two interrogators versus one suspect starts to really count. They’re just having a conversation, right? Well no, actually it’s two people from law enforcement. They’re on the same team. They’re working together, and when Watts dodges or balks at an answer, the other interrogator can say, “Hey, what she said was reasonable. Try again.” There’s no place to hide, especially when the interrogation is kept “gentle”.

CODER: To her point, if I walked in and my kid was decapitated, I’d call an ambulance….Right? It just, it just doesn’t make sense. It just doesn’t add up. So, either you’re this monster [holds up one hand]…

WATTS [Interrupts]: No.

CODER [Persisting]: I just want this young, hot girlfriend, so I’m gonna kill everyone and hope it works out, or…[holds out hand over his notepad] something. So, I think we’re very, very close to the truth, but not quite there yet.

Watts shakes his head, seems to splutter something, but is incapable here of saying anything. He has no game. He’s worn out and the anger is rising.

CODER [Pushing]: So, if you’re not that monster…

WATTS [Jumping in]: I’m not a monster. I didn’t [chops down on the table with the side of his right hand] kill…my babies.

CODER: Okay. So…tell us what actually happened.

WATTS [Under his breath]: I told you…what happened.

CODER [Gently]: I know…but…we’re getting later in the day. We’ve done this a few times and…we…we talk… then we show you a little bit of what we’re working with and the facts that we know…and then we kinda make our way to the truth.

WATTS [Choking on his words]: Everything I’ve told you is the truth.

Coder, stroking his chin, then hits Watts with a few punches to the gut. He asks Watts what’s going to happen when the cause of death comes back to him?

WATTS: It’s not going to.

CODER: You’re sure?

WATTS: I’m 100% positive…it’s not gonna come back to me.

CODER: Well, who’s it gonna come back to?

WATTS: Shan’ann was on top of Ceecee.

CODER: Okay.

WATTS [Sounding as if he’s smiling or sighing with frustration]: What do you want me to say?

CODER: I just want the truth.

WATTS [High pitched]: That is the truth.

CODER: What about Bella?

WATTS [His tone of voice sounds annoyed]: Bella was…[waves his hand] laid out, …sprawled on her bed. 

CODER: Okay.

WATTS: I saw…Shan’ann on top of Ceecee so I ran in there.

CODER: Okay. 

At this point both agents have their heads in their hands.

CODER [After a moment’s thought]: And then what happens when the coroner looks and sees fingerprints on her neck?

Coder gestures with his hand, against his neck.

Fullscreen capture 20190907 124607

WATTS [Murmuring softly]: They’re not gonna find my fingerprints.

CODER: Okay. What’s it gonna be?

WATTS [Sounding tearful]: It’s gonna be Shan’ann’s!

CODER [Reaches out his hand towards Watts]: Are you sure? But we don’t know about Bella, right?

WATTS [Sounding choked up]: Bella…she [speaking loudly]…that’s the commotion I heard upstairs. 

CODER: Okay. [Thinks for a moment]. Why take their bodies out of the house and bury ’em?

Watts throws up his hands.

WATTS [Speaking loudly]: I was scared. I didn’t know what else to do.

CODER: Okay.

WATTS [Still speaking loudly]: Nothing-nothing…nothing was gonna…[gestures, whispers]…I didn’t know what to do.

CODER [Sighs, sits back]: Yeah.

And then Watts starts to lash out verbally. They’ve been contradicting him again and again, and now he snaps. He doesn’t just snap, it’s been coming a long time.

WATTS Loudly]: I didn’t know what everything was gonna look like! [Watts gestures to the ground as if referring to the bodies]. My two babies were gone. And I just did that to my wife. 

Notice the order in which he says this.

My two babies were gone.

And I just did that to my wife.

WATTS: And I was the only one left in the house. [Shakes his head, juggles with his hands]. What do you expect is gonna happen? 

This is a covert admission of premeditated murder. This was the scenario Watts asked himself before the murders.

I was the only one left in the house.

What do you expect is gonna happen? 

CODER [Evenly]: It did look bad, right?

WATTS [Sounding emotional]: It looked [stutters]…I mean…a nightmare. 

Watts withdraws, puts his head in his hands. This was a flash, but more is in store.

CODER: Kay…kay…

Then Lee takes over, and wheedles Watts right where it hurts.

LEE: She [Shan’ann] was a pretty good mom, right?

WATTS [Sounding tearful]: I was a pretty good dad as well. I mean you know a person until you don’t know a person.

This is also a massive concession from him, psychologically. Again and again Shan’ann said she no longer knew who Chris was, and her friends said the same.

Fullscreen capture 20190907 154946

This is because Watts had changed, he was becoming – or trying to become – a different person.

Lee gently refers to Shan’ann, Bella and Celeste being vulnerable, and if Watts isn’t being truthful about who took their lives, then “that’s on them, too”. It’s a nice way of saying if he murdered them once, then by falsely accusing Shan’ann of the murders, he’s murdering them all again.

WATTS: Uh-huh. I know.

LEE: And you don’t wanna do that to them.

WATTS [Countering, looking Lee in the eye]: I’m not doing that to them.

Well, you are.

LEE: I’m just saying-

WATTS [Interrupting loudly]: NO-NO…I’m not doing that to them.

As Lee backtracks a little, conceding that perhaps Shan’ann and Watts were good parents, Coder hits Watts with the Bad Cop routine. And this is how they successfully extract information. Push, then when he reacts, pull back, then push again, repeat, repeat, repeat.

CODER: Why didn’t you put Shan’ann in the tanks?

Long seconds tick by.

WATTS [Wearily]: I didn’t know what else to do.

Next Watts talks about how far down into the ground he buried Shan’ann. He’s able to be quite casual talking about this. He estimates maybe he dug a hole two-feet deep, and maybe it took him 20-30 minutes.

WATTS: That was the location I was going to that morning…I didn’t know what else to do. I didn’t know what else to do.

LEE: So you weren’t thinking that far ahead.


Clearly law enforcement believe he was thinking that far ahead [in other words, premeditation], but they let the point go.

Coder takes up the baton, and once again, he’s not pulling any punches. He backtracks to their discussion the day prior, where Watts had described what had happened to his family as an act of pure evil.

CODER: What does that mean?

WATTS [Contemplates for a moment, then, when he speaks, his voices croaks]: I guess…it’s the evil that I saw when…I walked behind Shan’ann...and she was on top of Ceecee. And I felt evil for what I did to Shan’ann.

The answer to Coder’s question is that the evil was him. It was the evil he felt when he walked behind Shan’ann. In some cases Watts describes himself running behind Shan’ann. Ironically, this contradiction speaks deeply into the crime scene psychology.

CODER: So…one other thing that doesn’t make sense to me…[glancing up at the ceiling]…is…well…uh…can you walk me through again, when you walked in, what did she look like? What did Shan’ann look like? All you saw was her back. Was it the same shirt that you buried her in? Same underwear? Does she wear pajamas?

WATTS: Shan’ann? No, that’s what she sleeps in.

CODER: So when you grab her, just as is, that’s how she gets to the truck, and how she gets to the site.

Watts doesn’t answer, and Coder – unfortunately, inexplicably – leaves it at that. I’ve seen this a lot in interrogations. Instead of leaving a question hanging in the air, the interrogator answers it for the suspect, which allows the suspect not to answer. This was a precious opportunity to get Watts to respond to each question, but ultimately squandered. One could also argue that of course Shan’ann wasn’t buried in the clothing she wore when she arrived home. It’s unfortunately Coder mentioned pajamas, as this line of questioning afforded Watts a way out of answering all the other questions.


And then this moment happens. Lee asks if Shan’ann ever went to bed. It’s a simple enough question. It’s a yes or no question.


Then, in quick succession Watts is asked whether he poisoned Shan’ann, whether he killed her because of the money situation and whether he tried to use her credit card to buy hair-care products [or whether she did].

Then it’s on to the next tough question.

LEE: What were you talking to Nikki [Nichol Kessinger] about before your wife got home?

This is a reference to their 111 minute conversation roughly between 21:00 and 23:00. This is something both Watts and Kessinger have in common. They have very little to say about that crucial, crucial conversation on the night of murders.

Why can’t Nichol Kessinger Remember her 111 Minute Conversation on the night of the murders?

The 111 Minute Call on Nichol Kessinger’s Phone on the night of the murders

WATTS [Playing coy, and playing for time]: Before she got home?

LEE: You talked for several hours.

WATTS [Stuttering]: We talked a lot…conversations…just…a lot of conversations.

Again, they don’t push Watts on this question.

LEE: Does Nikki know about any of this?

WATTS: No she doesn’t…well, she knows like…from the news and everything like that.

LEE: Anything else?


LEE: Did she know your wife was pregnant?

WATTS: She does now.

tenorNot a straight denial, is it? It’s also an uncharacteristically cocky remark from Watts.

LEE: How come you didn’t tell her?

WATTS: I was scared to. Felt like…you know…she wouldn’t even have gone on a date with me…if she knew that…so…

CODER: Did she know you were married with kids?


CODER: Okay. But just not pregnant…


WATTS: I told her that we…we actively tried…before we met.

CODER: Oh, tried to get pregnant. 

WATTS: So she knew that.

CODER: What’s gonna happen when Nikki says, ‘We were planning on killing everyone and run off together’?

WATTS [Mumbles softly]: She’s not gonna say that.

At 18:24: 40, Coder and Lee tell Watts they’re going to be talking to Kessinger [they already are], and Watts rubs his face with chagrin. This is clearly a sign of distress, and how he shows it.

And so, this is the moment Watts becomes angry.

Are you sure you want to hear this?

CODER: So, are you sure she’s not going to say, ‘Hey, we were gonna kill ’em-‘

WATTS [Interrupting, plaintive]: No.

CODER: She’s not goinn say-

WATTS [Interrupts again, curt]: No.

CODER [Tries again]: Okay, she’s not gonna say, ‘We were making plans about buying a house or getting an apartment…’ She’s not gonna say that?

WATTS [Muttering]:…she’s…have my own place…just to hang out more.

CODER: Okay.

WATTS: Please don’t put her name out there. She’s been through enough in her lifetime.

CODER: We never try to put out-

WATTS [Interrupting]: It’s just that…I had an affair…and they would drag her through the mud…and I wouldn’t want that.

LEE: So what do you think about everything now? Do you feel sorry for what you did?


WATTS [Croaking]:…if I wouldn’t have lost control…and then…did that.

CODER: So after we get their bodies, things are gonna we different then. We’re gonna have a lot more questions.

At 18:30:12 Watts lets on that “maybe” the wind took the sheet at the well site.

At this point there are just 6 minutes remaining from the First Confession.

Fullscreen capture 20190907 111429Fullscreen capture 20190907 111526

For more statement analysis and transcripts from the discovery, read the last 4 books of the series, starting with book 5 DRILLING THROUGH DISCOVERY.

The Turning Point in Kessinger’s Interview with CBI Agent Kevin Koback

For the first 20 minutes of the two hour plus discussion on Thursday, August 16th, Kessinger speaks in vanilla generalizations. Even after Koback reminds Kessinger that they’re talking because a woman is dead [Shan’ann’s body was exhumed hours prior to the discussion], and it’s become a homicide investigation, Kessinger still pushes back telling him she’s can’t give him specific information. She tells Koback, who is grovelling for details at one point:

It’s not gonna happen!

But then there’s a turning point. Kessinger begins to reveal slightly more and then  more still. Below is Koback’s summary following the turning point in his interrogation of Watts’ mistress.

Fullscreen capture 20190213 233359Fullscreen capture 20190213 233500Fullscreen capture 20190213 233748Fullscreen capture 20190213 235942Fullscreen capture 20190213 235945Fullscreen capture 20190213 235948Fullscreen capture 20190213 235952Fullscreen capture 20190213 235958


This is how an elite Defense Lawyer could take on the Watts case, and win…

The case against Amanda Knox is a useful reference case for the Chris Watts case, particularly in the area of the interrogation. Watts’ interrogation was long and exhausting. It involved three hours on Tuesday night [August 13] followed by seven hours the next day [August 14]. It could also be argued that he was informally interrogated for four additional hours, between 14:07 until around 18:00 when the cops were at his home.

If one adds the various phone calls, including several very early in the morning, the numbers on the clock really start adding up.

There are more than just a few glaring similarities between the Chris Watts case and the Amanda Knox case. For starters:

  • Both confessed [and both confessions were bogus but derived to some extent from the true facts of the crime and crime scene
  • Both implicated an innocent third party
  • Both spoke at length during their interrogations, believing [or presenting] themselves to be “helping” investigators.
  • Both went to elaborate lengths to obstruct justice [Watts by disposing of the bodies and removing evidence. Knox false accusation against Patrick Lumumba – to name one example – meant he was jailed for two weeks before he was finally cleared].
  • Both were at the scene of the crime the next day, spotted by the media and behaving not a little inappropriately, but very inappropriately. This included not just physical behavior and demeanor but many statements made to various witnesses.
  • Amanda Knox claimed “I wasn’t there” because very little evidence was found of her in Meredith Kercher’s bedroom. Although never tested in court, Watts also seemed to claim he wasn’t there [he was at work, or barbecuing] when his family disappeared or were murdered, even though they lived in the same house.
  • Both Knox and Watts suggest some unknown intruder came into the home, committed murder, took virtually nothing and left no traces of themselves.

The list goes on…

Amanda Knox Says ‘Coercive’ Police Interrogation Led Her to Change Her Story – Time

Chris Watts mother says he didn’t kill daughters Bella and Celeste; claims he was coerced into taking a plea deal – CrimeOnline

Amanda Knox tells court police hit her during interrogation – Guardian

Italy Wrongly Deprived Amanda Knox of Legal Counsel, Court Rules – New York Times

How Foxy Knoxy changed her tune about the night Meredith was murdered – Daily Mail

Amanda Knox’s Confession

The Illegal Interrogation of Amanda Knox

To understand how easily a top defense lawyer could have mounted a successful defense in the Watts case, we need only take a casual look at the Amanda Knox case, and how she was able to beat almost all the charges against her over the course of a multi-year court battle against the Italian courts. [Knox was convicted of slandering Patrick Lumumba, and later Knox and her parents were accused of slandering the police but not convicted].

A key part of Knox’s defense was to undermine, invalidate and challenge the police interrogation against her. So despite living in the house opposite the room where Meredith Kercher was stabbed to death, the real criminals – the real suspects – weren’t her and her boyfriend. It was the dodgy, abusive cops. That’s who people should have looked at. The real crime wasn’t someone stabbing Kercher in the throat [burying the blade so far into her throat it stopped at the hilt]. The real violence were the two SLAPS Knox received while the cops were talking to her.

And the police are to blame for the fact that the suspects didn’t call their lawyers. Raffaele Sollecito, Knox’s boyfriend at the time, was offered legal aid by a family member and rejected it. Knox’s aunt also repeatedly advised her to contact the embassy/consulate. It seems it’s okay if family make these advisements and the suspects reject them, but it’s not okay if the cops don’t [or allegedly don’t].

Knox’s father appeared to hire a PR firm at the same time lawyers were hired to clean up the mess. How the narrative is configured: The police should have told the suspects that them being questioned in the police station about a murder in their home meant they were potentially at legal peril [otherwise they would have no way of knowing].

We know in the Watts case that he was repeatedly told he could leave the interrogation at any time, and he also received advice from friends and family [Nick Thayer and his father Ronnie Watts respectively] to get a lawyer. Despite his dumb refusal to get legal advice, Watts could have a lawyer plead the case that like Amanda Knox [and Brendan Dassey], Watts was tricked, coerced, tortured, manipulated and confessed under duress.

While there is some evidence to support this defense, what’s all clear is Watts did commit murder in his own home, and did tamper with evidence, and did move the bodies. Nevertheless, his best defense isn’t to defend the merits of his case, but to attack the police interrogation and investigation.

Theoretically he could also claim that a minor, Nicolas Atkinson, contaminated and compromised the crime scene [framed him, set him up etc] and that the officer on the scene [Coonrod] was negligent or reckless in “allowing” this to happen.

In the Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson cases, there is muddiness around the moment of arrest, and whether the suspects knew they were being arrested, whether they were arrested, and whether the right procedures were followed. As soon as a suspect is arrested, ironically, they win a series of inalienable rights, while at the same time, law enforcement must follow strict protocols. Top defense lawyers are experts in finding loopholes in where or whether these protocols weren’t followed to the letter.

When a murder is committed, and a suspect emerges, the cops have a right to question that person [whether they are a witness, a person of interest or an “official” suspect]. It’s in society’s interest that law enforcement exercise this right to question or interrogate, otherwise everyone would get away with murder. Also, the sooner they can question the better.

We often see when a suspect is guilty, their main tool is not only to deceive, but also to delay. The more time that passes [especially where bodies are missing], the more it plays into their favor.

As mentioned, the process of arresting and interrogating is tricky though. While the cops have the rights to ask questions, the person they wish to question also has rights, including the right to remain silent.

It all becomes muddy when the suspect gives up the right to remain silent and the cops may pretend or manipulate the situation, basically playing along that they know less than they really do, or don’t really believe the person in their custody is guilty [when they do, or have strong reason to].

If both sides are trying to manipulate the other side, even if the suspect is lying, the legal case tends to favor the defense side. It’s seen as unseemly that law enforcement would use deception or underhandedness to catch their killer, and to some extent this is justified.

The flip side though, is this:

A murderer is a liar. If the cops were 100% upfront about everything, there would be little point in having an interrogation. Just give the suspect a clipboard to tick off a few questions and let them go. But in the grey area of true crime, a suspect has to be able to explain and reason their behavior to the cops, and this can become a game of psychological warfare. Who decides when that line is crossed, or where it is?

In the Knox case, a big part of her accusation that she was misled lay in her claim that she couldn’t speak Italian, and thus was in the dark about what was really happening to her. While we can clearly hear her speaking fluent Italian in the video clips below [one months after her arrest], and while it’s clear her boyfriend at the time was Italian [and he could hardly speak English], the onus does fall on the cops [even though they were Italian], to have made provision for an interpreter. So while the actual argument is probably not sound [or true], the legal argument is another matter.

When Watts took the polygraph test, he was given a demonstration where he was told to lie, and shown the results. This test was meant to provide unambiguous proof that he understood the English language, understood the difference between right and wrong [telling the truth and lying], and took the test anyway.

Another aspect that made it difficult for Knox to be prosecuted was the huge amount of negative PR coming from America [and later from Britain] directed at the Italian police and justice system.

fullscreen capture 20190125 002828

fullscreen capture 20190125 003512

The Knox PR camp successfully turned a criminal case into a political one. This meant Italy [the country] had more to gain by not convicting Knox than by convicting her.


It also became a lot more difficult to execute on the confessions on Knox when the interrogation and the police were being undermined in the media.

Now, at the zenith of the #MeToo movement, we see a European court – more than ten years after the criminal trial – upholding Knox’s “human rights”.

In theory, had Watts taken his case to trial, a top defense lawyer could have surfed this wave of his clients rights being violated at every turn. In addition to that, if he admitted to being bisexual, he could also question the motives of the imputed murderer of the children, and the rush to judgement by the cops to be a form of conscious or subconscious discrimination.

In the OJ Simpson case the acquittal wasn’t for lack of evidence, but because the jury sympathized and identified with the race of the defendant, and further, wanted revenge against an allegedly racist detective [Mark Fuhrman].

In true crime, and criminal law, we want the criminals to be evil and absolutely guilty, and the cops chasing them to be completely good, and completely innocent in their police work and interrogations.

Defense lawyers know the cops are only human, and as far as the law is concerned, that can trump the guilt of the defendant. If there is no reasonable doubt by way of the defendant, the methods used by the cops can be used to manufacture it. There’s no doubt that Watts was manipulated and misled during his interrogation. There’s also no doubt that he was actively manipulating and actively misleading about three murders and a recent burial of all three bodies. Sometimes the manipulation of the cops can turn a case, and a verdict, as we see in the Knox case.

Sometimes a degree of play-acting by law enforcement seems necessary and even justified. As they say, it takes a thief to catch a thief. In the Watts case we see how it takes the same foxy thinking to outwit and catch a liar and a murder, especially as they are doing everything they can to avoid telling the truth, being caught or held to account for their crimes. Ultimately, just as in the Knox confession, even when Watts did confess, the confession was a lie.

During their respective interrogations, the cops finally offered both Watts and Knox a way out, an exit, and both took it and ran with it. Both took the bait of blaming and implicating someone else.

In the Watts case, what this revealed was that his “disappeared” family were dead, all of them murdered, and he knew it. He’d known it all along. The fact that he could nonchalantly play act with the cops for hours on end, with a straight face, knowing they were dead is what horrifies us.

But at the moment he acknowledged the lie the cops offered him, that Shan’ann had killed his daughters, he admitted a) that he knew they were dead and b) that he was there when they died. Then, automatically he became the prime suspect not in a missing person’s case but in a homicide investigation.

fullscreen capture 20190125 005736

In the Amanda Knox case, the moment she acknowledged hearing Lumumba murdering Meredith, she also admitted being at the scene during her murder. But the outcome of that bogus confession has since favored her, hasn’t it? Perhaps in due course Watts will appeal along this very same tenuous line of defense. Do you think he’ll win or that he should?

Interrogation 101: The Good Cop, Bad Cop Routine worked like a charm with Chris Watts

The confession seems so easy now, in hindsight, doesn’t it? Like taking candy from a baby. Well, it’s easy to say that in hindsight. In fact, Watts only cracked after about 10 hours of questioning. 4 on Tuesday the 14th, and 6 more the next morning. There was also a polygraph test, which turned on the pressure, and Watts father Ronnie, waiting [like a carrot] for the operative moment to provide comfort.

Besides all this, the male and female interrogators – both well trained agents – were engaged in a kind of psychological warfare with Watts. They were leading him down a path, and to be frank, he was trying to lead them too, and to some extent he did [because his confession was ultimately only a partial confession].

Fullscreen capture 20181201 150400Fullscreen capture 20181201 150416Fullscreen capture 20181201 150427Fullscreen capture 20181201 150435Fullscreen capture 20181201 150453Fullscreen capture 20181201 150500

The moment the agents leave the room and Ronnie replaces them, and vice versa, is also carefully timed. When Ronnie leaves, it’s just as he starts talking about hiring a lawyer.Fullscreen capture 20181201 150510Fullscreen capture 20181201 150512

In the Discovery Documents [page 606] the narrative is flipped around, where Ronnie leaves the room and then mentions a lawyer. In reality, it’s when he mentions the lawyer the agents come rushing back in. This is one reason why the narrative isn’t a proper transcript, but a summary written from a “third person” perspective.

Fullscreen capture 20181201 162333

Fullscreen capture 20181201 150538Fullscreen capture 20181201 150544


Don’t laugh but the same Good Cop Bad Cop routine both worked and backfired in the classic confrontation between Batman and Joker in The Dark Knight. Batman thinks he’s getting what he wants, and he does get information, but he’s ALSO being played.